According to the National Law Journal, a former KPMG senior manager filed a class action last week seeking $350 million for KPMG’s women managers, senior managers and managing directors.

It will come as no surprise to ForbesWoman readers that only 18% of all KPMG partners are women even though they make up nearly half of all KPMG employees.

As the National Law Journal explained,

[lead plaintiff'] Kassman claims she was told that KPMG cut her base salary by $20,000 while she was on maternity leave in 2003 because she was paid “too much.” When she asked her male supervisor how she could get that salary back, Kassman claims the supervisor said she did not need the money because she “ha[d] a nice engagement ring.”

Kassman’s complaints will be familiar to women managers, executives, and professionals everywhere. She claims that she wasn’t promoted based on complaints by her male subordinates that they “didn’t like her tone,” was “unapproachable” and “too direct.” She also claims to be within a class of working mothers who are treated as second class employees.

Sadly, among the Big Four accounting firms, KPMG is tied for first place for its high percentage of women partners.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

So, half the people who work at KPMG are women, but only 18% are managers, which equals a lawsuit by women alleging all sorts of discrimination.

Why on earth would any corporation dare hire a woman? They have to be the most litigious bunch around. The legal business would be a smaller and less wealthy profession without this type of client.

I work in the health field. I find women are eager for the perks and salaries of managers, but not so eager about doing the job. If the job demands extra hours or tasks, many women would prefer to spend time with the family. They also seem as receptive to gifts proffered by any number of suppliers for continued loyalty.

Take a look at women doctors. Is the reason why they work far less than their male counterparts discrimination by male patients, perhaps?

A word of advice to any firm willing to fill an executive position with a woman, married with children or not, who will find any number of excuses as to why she cannot perform a simple task, and sue you if she finds herself criticized or held back from advancement upon individual or general grounds of a sexual, abusive, or discriminatory nature: don’t!

Whatever the answer is, women’s class action lawsuits are sure to outnumber men’s by about 20 to 1. I give the 1 to men because I cannot find any exclusively for men. Race based and non-sex class actions – yes, but exclusively a man’s class action lawsuit – not a one. Not even at Wal-Mart, where about 70% of the employees are women, have men even hinted at such a law suit. If it were reversed, no doubt the women would be seeking one.

If the Supreme Court allows the Wal-Mart fiasco to move forward, then it will end up in the next 10 moving up to 50 to 1, the 1 being dubious.

As I said, to prevent huge future financial demands and charges from women, abetted by all those like minded women on the Supreme Court and throughout the court system, don’t hire them.

By the way, its always such a treat that so many women will note their disadvantages in the workforce. When it comes to their advantages, how reticent they all become. Not even you are immune to the practice. If only a women would report on the many advantages they share in the workplace!

But it will never happen, because women must invariably be the victim. Women must have special programs, freely supplied education, hiring advantages, the exemption from endurance tests long in use, and quotas to ensure their supremacy in once male dominated professions and occupations. But you will never see the same for men in women dominated professions and occupations like nursing and teaching.

Even more shocking is the percentage of pregnancy discrimination lawsuits brought by women every year. What a bunch of whiners! Not a single man has EVER filed such a suit. Clearly the solution is is sterilization. That would also dispose of all those lawsuits seeking financial support from the parents of minor children. I’ll bet the majority of those cases are filed by women too!

Pregnancy discrimination lawsuits! I can certainly understand there may be some individual complaints, but every time a woman files a lawsuit does she have to involve her entire sex in the affair? Companies have to shape their entire employment apparatus around a birthing function, and still they face one lawsuit after another. They have to offer women every costly privilege possible, to the detriment of many men and male minorities, to increase their representation in any area a woman feels slighted. Even if the companies comply, they still face lawsuits because they didn’t perform the outrageously discriminatory practices to perfection.

And all of this perfectly harmonizes with a selfish woman’s movement that seeks privilege, never equality, in the field of human rights and certainly in employment.

Just read Rikleen’s prescription above for confirmation.

In the world of aged philosophy and human affairs its called the merit principle, something that women like yourself have yet to discover. Promotion based upon sex is only going to guarantee idiocy, which is why women always do well in the public service and why they tend to lean more to the big government spending Democrats.

Its too bad that so many brilliant women, who compete on the merit principle, and women seeking a true equality do not raise their voice against these shameless and elitist practices and beliefs advocated by these despicable women’s organizations.

I think my problem with this article is how biased it is. In your article Ms. Pynchon, you stated that Ms. Kassman didn’t receive a raise based on how her male subordinates “didn’t like her tone,” or how she was “unapproachable” or even “too direct.” If I received complaints like that from my male or female subordinates, I would expect not to get a raise at my job. That being said, maybe her company has other grounds for not giving her that raise. Or maybe Ms. Kassman has started taking time off of work for her new child and is still being compensated what she was prior to being a mother. Regardless, your article is extremely one sided. You as a “commentator” have failed to present to your audience any insight from KPMG. Had you have done so, your “commentary” would have been much stronger. That being said, if I, a woman, talked to your bosses about your lack of professional commentary and others did as well, would you sue your employer for not providing you a raise? I don’t think so. -Ms. Chen